Fix for bz#13658 - using fsincos on x86-64
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
Wed Mar 7 13:51:00 GMT 2012
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> So, the result has nothing to do with the expected result. The test
> passes on x86-64.
>
> I could add the testcase and the fix for x86-64 and not run it on i386 -
> or only run it on x86-64. What do you propose?
Is this failing on i386 with sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_sincos.S removed? Because
I'd expect both x86-64 and i386 to need the same fix at the same time.
Actually it looks like s_sincos.c is using __sin and __cos - meaning that
i386 would need s_sin.S and s_cos.S removed as well. But I'd guess that
sin and cos have the same problems for large inputs (insufficiently
accurate range reduction) as sincos and so that making i386 follow x86-64
in using the generic dbl-64 versions of those functions would also be an
improvement.
(Eventually all of sin, cos, tan, sincos should have testcases for large
inputs covering all of float, double, long double - but that will need
quite a few more fixes including ldbl-96 implementations of a few
functions. So I think we should get in the minimum that can be done
incrementally, then follow up later with more fixes and tests for more
functions, for more input formats.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list